4 ms·

EFF would probably argue that technologies like safe browsing are also a shift away from E2E encryption. They were strongly against email spam protection in the

• aaomidi 5y ago
  You mean when they said blanket banning email lists is bad and shouldn't be done? Because yeah that's still true.
  • shuckles 5y ago
    That was in the 2000s and a different issue and not opposed on privacy grounds. There they argued they were defending freedom of speech. In the 90s the argument was against early probabilistic models.
• vimacs2 5y ago
  Framing the EFF's position as being against browser safety or spam protection is disingenuous.
  • shuckles 5y ago
    I didn’t say they were against either. I said their opposition to iMessage parental control features as a change to E2E encryption translates directly to other messages client safety features that may reveal the content of communication to a third party. (Nobody in the discourse seems to take their FUD about iMessage seriously, given that the focus has largely been on known CSAM detection.) In particular, you can be concerned about E2E encryption being compromised while still believing parents should have some transparency over whether their kids are receiving explicit images. Not clear EFF offers a solution that meets both, but I did not say they are opposed to the latter.
• slownews45 5y ago
  I remember those arguments against spam filtering! Now we all accept it as annoying but necessary? My guess is this may meet a similar fate.